>You cannot have satisfying combat in a tabletop game while relying on "theater of the mind," especially if the game relies on positioning for its combat mechanics.
>>64569905>hard brainlets to believe
>>64569905I actually agree, with the caveat that you also still don't need a full grid map with minis stuff. Some paper markers and a rough scale is all you need for 90% of encounters.>the only players that complain about quantum ogres, light fudging of rolls and other GM tricks have never GMed themselves, and so don't understand how necessary it is to employ these tricks on occasion. A great campaign will almost never be achieved on the back of a completely legit and honest GM.
>>64569905If system doesn't involve much tactical shit like flanking and cover - why not?Although even in stuff like DW it's better to have at least some resemblance of map for combat on complex terrain.
>>64570084>If system doesn't involve much tactical shit like flanking and cover - why not?Because you'll never have a true scale of the conflict and most of the time, it'll feel like the DM is making shit up as he goes along to make sure that his own units are close/far enough for you to either hit them or just be outside of your character's range.>Okay, I attack Ogre 1 and then I'll move away after I hit him a few times.>Alright, roll for your attack and damage>[next turn]>Okay anon, the ogre is going to attack you>Which one?>The one you attacked earlier>but I moved away from him with my movement action>Oh right...in that case ogre 2 is going to hit you insteadIt's much easier to make tactical decisions when you actually know how far something is from your character at all times, even if the game itself doesn't use hard tactical mechanics by default.
>>64569905>combat is the least interesting part of any RPG and deserves to be deemphasized
>>64570247That assumes the game has precise movement actions where creatures can move an amount defined down to the feet, and no longer, but you also insist on going ToM. A good ToM system won't even let you take that sort of kiting action.What I'm saying is, 5e is a shit that tries to have its cake and eat it too.
>>64569905>If you think that rolling openly is a good idea, it's only because you've never actually found a GM who you actually trusted to run a good game for you and your group.
>>64569905There are two acceptable ways to run combat in a TTRPG. Either you take the D&D approach and go full resource-management board game, or you abstract the whole thing down to "when anyone engages another entity in combat, both entities roll and whoever gets a lower total dies (or in incapacitated if the opponent chooses)". Anything that's in a middle ground could be improved by pushing it towards whichever extreme it's closer to.
>>64570293If a game uses numerical values to judge how far something is from you, it needs a grid.
>>64570317Yes, that's basically what I'm saying.
>>64570317This is patently untrue. Take a lesson from tabletop wargames and introduce miniatures and tape measures - things become less finnicky, but you do have to convert everything into inches or centimeters.
>>64570290Honestly this, I've yet to play a tabletop game where the combat was the best part, unless there was an actual reason for us to fight the person beyond "the DM needs an encounter to fill up the last hour of session time."
>>64570370It's basically the same thing except grids actually have clearly measurements for what an inch represents while chit measurements are more open with how your character can progress around the board.Whichever way you choose, we can both agree that exact measurements require some sort of board to keep track of how far everything is from each other.
>>64570049I haven't needed to fudge anything. When do it, it's because I'm justifiably scared of players throwing a tantrum and crashing the game over the tiniest setback ('oh no, my PC was incapacitated briefly during one fight. Better storm out, claim he's ruined, and demand the whole story be binned'), not because it makes for a better campaign.>>64570293>5e grid combat5e is a tactical wargame pretending that it can run TotM. It does that to reduce the perceived cost of entry; if people feel like they need an accessory like a battlemat they might be dissuaded, but if they only realize its necessity halfway through then they have sunk cost fallacy behind them already.
>>64570370I think anon meant broadly that one needs visually-represented measurable distances between characters i.e. not TotM
>>64570370That's way more fiddly than grids, and either slows shit down as everyone is measuring things trying to edge out some advantage, or leads to arguments over precision while also testing the (imo) boring skill of eye-measurement.If you don't run into these things, or they don't bother you, more power to you, but as far as I'm concerned, grids are the ways to go for ease of play.
>>64569905> Women are, in every way that matters, inferior to men in combat. Your world lacks verisimilitude if you don't take that into account.
>>64569905Warhammer was a dying game and the End Times was the best thing that could have happened. Most companies would have just shut it down without a grand event that wrapped up all the loose plot hooks.Age of Sigmar is actually a worthy successor.
>>64570506Verisimilitude isn't a measurement of how well a setting conforms to real life m8, just logical consistency within its own context. This is a case where you should have used realism, but didn't because you wanted to bait.
>>64570506"The same Otto who rescued my girls?" "The very same my good woman" he said clearly enjoying himself, Sej noticed his eyes wandering over Ellen's ample figure, briefly glancing at the two younger women in tow who were still looking more towards Sej while Otto and Ellen spoke. The dark haired one spoke up to Sej "You are the mercenary commander aren't you?" "I am" Sej said, they looked to each other excitedly, Sej asked them "You two work for Ellen right? Bedwarmers or medics?" They both stopped and looked at her uncertainly, the straw haired one shuffling nervously while the raven haired one crossed her arms and said "Is that an issue?" Sej was confused for a moment then responded "Not at all, both are important, though bedwarmer is certainly a young woman's job, much like mercenary. I just put others on their backs" She said. The raven haired one gave a laugh at that, seemingly at ease she asked Sej "How do you do it?" "Pardon?" "How do you fight and kill men?" She asked. Sej thought for a moment before tapping the bandage on her face and saying "with caution and training"
>>64569905All the legendary greentexts are exaggerated or completely fake
>>64570542Very defensible position until you got to the last sentence.
>>64570600Honestly, I used verisimilitude because I DIDN'T want to bait. If I used the realism argument, we'd do the same shit-storm again. I accept that not all worlds are realistic (With magic and so on) but you still need some base principles to create a sense of verisimilitude.It's like if female knights existed in Pendragon. Pendragon is basically King Arthur: The Game, and it states that "Yes, female knights don't exist. You can make them if you want, but they're non-canonical. Arthurian myth just doesn't work with regard to female knights."
>>64570625Just because a greentext is fake doesn't mean that it's any less entertaining.
>>64570635It does however mean you'll never have a game that good
>>64569905>If the whole party seems terrible it's much more likely you're the terrible one and should leave.
>>64569905>streaming your games is never a good idea because the only people who do that well are already entertainers and they aren't playing for fun, they're playing to entertain and get their enjoyment from that>tabletop rpgs are by their nature only entertaining to participate in, not to watch.
>>64570649>Even if you aren't the terrible one, you're better off leaving anyways than going to a game you don't enjoy because of the people you're playing with.
>>64570634Yeah but what those base principles are is going to vary heavily with genre. Having physically weaker females in a wuxia or superhero game where characters have bullshitonium-powered muscles doesn't contribute to versimilitude at all.
>>64570693Not that guy, but women are still weaker in wuxia. Women use different styles of fighting from men, they don't have super-strength.For instance, one fighting style relies on a woman's greater range of mobility, because women don't have testicles. The villain, being an eunuch, learned this sword technique. Because he doesn't have balls to slow him down.
>>64569905People want their games to be better while refusing to acknowledge its flaws
>>64570718Being different doesn't equal, and I quote >>64570506> Women are, in every way that matters, inferior to men in combat. Your world lacks verisimilitude if you don't take that into account.It's fine for women to use different techniques in wuxia.When you say they HAVE to be weaker it's time to ask yourself the question why that is important to you.
>>64570743>When you say they HAVE to be weaker it's time to ask yourself the question why that is important to you.Because it's the way of things? I can buy a female sorceress or priestess. A woman who can throw men around like the Hulk simply doesn't make sense. I mean, look at Casca and Guts in Berserk. Even before Casca gets raped into insanity, she's still an inferior fighter! Not because she isn't skilled, she just can't match a dude who has the muscle mass to swing a huge sword around. In fact, the one time they get separated, she's significantly weaker from being on her period.
>>64570773>A woman who can throw men around like the Hulk simply doesn't make sense.What if it's... She Hulk?
>>64570778Canonically, She-Hulk is weaker than the Hulk, though.
>>64569905If you want to play tactical combat, break out fucking Warhammer Quest or Infinity or any other skirmish game and have DM be the opponent, not hobble yourself by playing an RPG like a wargame.
>>64570795But shes stronger than everyone else
>>64570830Yeah, and that makes sense because it's the gamma that gives her super powers. I'm okay with that, since they're overcoming that inherent handicap (And explicitly addressing it) with a power.
>>64570773>I mean, look at Casca and Guts in Berserk. Even before Casca gets raped into insanity, she's still an inferior fighter!That's true for literally everyone in the series. Griffith ends up being an inferior fighter to Guts.>Because it's the way of things? I can buy a female sorceress or priestess. A woman who can throw men around like the Hulk simply doesn't make sense. I have misspoken by using "weaker", what I should have said (and what I thought was obvious from the quote)When you say they HAVE to be inferior to men in combat, it's time to ask yourself the question why that is important to you.
>>64570877>When you say they HAVE to be inferior to men in combat, it's time to ask yourself the question why that is important to you.What, you mean verisimilitude? Again, I'm perfectly fine with a woman having a (usually magical) reason to be as good as the guys. But a woman shouldn't able to overcome a man in hand-to-hand combat barring explicitly-stated reasons, like ball-less kung fu.
>>64570412So you have done it to create a better experience for your players?
>>64570900>So you have done it to create a better experience for your players?I've done it because one of them in particular throws tantrums whenever something doesn't go his way.The other players are fine, mature people who can handle failing at something once in their lives.
>>64570898In a world where people can jump onto first and second story building roofs with no magic needed because wuxia, it doesn't break verisimilitude for the women to be as good at it as the men.
>>64570898Okay. Why is this important to you?
>>64570898No. Verisimilitude means consistent within its own context. In the world of DnD, for example, all fighters of the same build and level are exactly as powerful as each other. This makes the world internally consistent. Since questions of biology are never addressed, there is no reason to ever wonder about a lack of disparity.
>>64570941Right, so you'd agree that fudging rolls can be a way to improve your groups experience. Because right now you're sounding like those pro-lifers who think their abortions are OK, but everyone else's are not.
>>64570854You got hangups
>>64570247Unless the player in question is Ogre 2's closest target, or the Ogre 2 has some sort of deep bond with Ogre 1 that demands that it exact vengeance, I don't see why Ogre 2 would go out of it's way to attack the player. Sure, it could 'coincidentally' pan out that way, but you're leaning closer to 'the GM using two ogres to fight the players' rather than 'the GM roleplaying as two ogres fighting the players'.
>>64569905Mythras has satifying combat that takes place within the theater of the mind, with the main positioning mechanic being engaged and unengaged>>64570290Personal preference, also 4e>>64570297This depends on the player percpective as well as the tone of the game and how well the mechanics reflect that.>>64570301Forbidden Lands has a resource system that is abstract and a tactical combat system, which when put together reflect the tone of the game.>>64570506By definition you are playing RPGs incorrectly if you're playing them as a simulation of the real world.>>64570676RPGs are in essence a conversation about hypothetical situations. There are a couple hundred podcasts that revolve around simple conversations. Also I was listening to roleplay podcasts before critical role. >>64570805I stand by 4e, also most skirmish games can't actually hand the scope of anything on the level of D&D.I believe the others for the most part.
I just draw out maps on my tablet and use that for reference. No way in hell I'm spending money on minis for Shadowrun.
>>64570773It's also the way of things that magic isn't real. It's the way of things that without modern medicine wounds that aren't immediately dangerous might get infected and kill you later. It's the way of things that pre-modern settings are likely to have all kinds of nasty contagious diseases around, and realistically speaking your character should have a chance of contracting such a disease without being able to do much about it. All kinds of things are the way of things in the real world, and all of these things are the way of things in fictitious settings if and only if the writers feel like they add something to the setting. Gritty and realistic settings have their place, but there's absolutely no reason why every setting should be like that. Women being inferior fighters to men isn't any more inherently important to verisimilitude than the possibility of your character dying of cholera or whatever.
>>64571047I never said that it's okay when I do it. I'd rather just have the stones to power through this guy and run a somewhat challenging game for the others.I do it out of fear, not because I think it improves anything.
>>64571177You'll find in many cases where TotM is used, DM's, especially newbies, will handwave the ranges on some things so that they're always the right distance for what they plan on doing with them, regardless of what they said beforehand.It's not to say that TotM can't work, it's just that it requires more work to maintain consistency than using tape measurements or a grid since it requires that the DM paint a good enough picture of the battlefield to give players an accurate idea of just how far a target is from their position and where their position is relative to the other movers and shakers on the board.
>>64571400All other things being equal, the typical woman has always been physically inferior to the typical man. It was true in the stone age, it's true now, and it is a fact that every society on earth recognizes. This isn't disease, where it's easy to ignore it because it isn't in my face all the time, this is a general truth that still affects life. It breaks my immersion when typical women beat up typical men because it makes no sense that an inferior combatant would beat a superior one without some sort of extenuating circumstances.
>>64569905>nerds are more damaging to the hobby than new blood
>>64571567>It breaks my immersion when typical women beat up typical men because it makes no sense that an inferior combatant would beat a superior one without some sort of extenuating circumstances.... if she beats him, doesn't that make her the superior combatant?
>>64571567>All other things being equal, the typical woman has always been physically inferior to the typical man. It was true in the stone age, it's true now, and it is a fact that every society on earth recognizes.None of that seems very relevant to my point.>It breaks my immersion when typical women beat up typical men because it makes no sense that an inferior combatant would beat a superior one without some sort of extenuating circumstances.Okay. It doesn't break my immersion, though, and it definitely isn't in any objective way more unrealistic than, I dunno, pretty much anything that happens in the average action movie or kung fu story or whatever. It doesn't really have anything to do with verismilitude, it's just a thing you personally dislike.
>>64571426You're still a hypocrite.
>>64571567>because it makes no sense that an inferior combatant would beat a superior one without some sort of extenuating circumstances.So, does a single badass defeating a whole bunch of moderately skilled combatants also break your immersion for the same reason?
>>64571595Fucking this! There's nothing worse than dealing with a grog who fucks up your game because he doesn't like the way you run games.
>>64571426So you are saying it's okay when you do it
>>64569905>metagaming is only a problem because you’re bad at running gamesAnd, related:>literally nobody is impressed by your troll who’s only vulnerable to ice. It’s njsf further proof that you’re bad at running games.
>>64569905No matter how certain you are that the DM's judgement call is incorrect it doesn't matter and won't change a thing
>>64569905a female warrior that has the stats of a male warrior should be as big and bulky like said male warrior
Making special rules for some players who want their PC to be something special ruins it for everyone else because no one likes playing with a special snowflake.
>>64571743I'm doing something wrong and trying to change. It's hard because I usually resolve to be more tough on my friends, but then I get scared of them throwing a tantrum mid-session and back down again.
>>64571872Based, muscles make my dick hard.
>>64571872Unlike demanding that women should be physically inferior to men regardless of setting, this one is actually pretty reasonable.
>>64570370I’ve played a dark heresy and a SWRPG campaign using a tape measure and children’s building blocks laying around. I DMd the dark heresy game (2e) and the group fucking loved it since the terrain was so easy to lay out but since it wasn’t a grid it seemed to work better especially since I used 40k minis for all the characters in a fight so the scale was deemed true. Cover and line of sight was super easy to calculate and the terrain was “interactive” in that if a table was flipped in a shootout all I had to do was turn a block sideways and boom it’s live. I highly recommend 3d terrain even if it’s as basic as building blocks like I used, it adds so much depth.
>>64569905Eh, for super deep combat, sure, but satisfying and fun combat can definitely be done with ToM. I was just in a session with that, even.
>>64571872I’ll drink to that.
>>64570998Because needlessly contradicting reality is something that should be avoided.
>>64571872>a female warrior that has the stats of a male warrior should be as big and bulky like said male warriorThis isn't very hard to swallow, but I accept it
>>64571670I'm curious to see the response to this as well. Statistically, the odds of a "average man vs. average woman" fight are stacked in the man's favor but are nowhere near zero for the woman. However, a single melee or unarmed combatant against three or more semicompetant combatants with no extenuating circumstances pretty much IS zero, yet it's easily achievable in the vast majority of RPGs. I wonder if that bothers this guy as well.
>>64572052Sure, but if competent female warriors being a thing is desired for whatever reason, and I mean any reason whatsoever, then it's not done needlessly.
>>64570998>>64572052Rather, needlessly and inexplicably contradicting reality is especially to be avoided.
>>64569905Play torchbearer. Combat in that is fucking awesome and expects theatre of the mind.
>>64572091Obviously, if it's a woman. That's just not happening.
>>64572091That scenario is entirely explicable. Player characters have whole sheets for that purpose.
>>64570317I have never used a grid and all the games I've played have relied on numerical values for range and distance. I really don't get what the problem is to play without a grid or something of that sort.
>>64570743Would you question why a child would be weaker than an adult? Even at the highest levels of competition, there is a vast gap between the strength and ability of men and women that is self evident. If the Olympics didn't divide sexes there would literally never be another female gold medalist
>>64572076What's the chance when said single combatant is 5'2'' 150 pounds, and has arms like twigs
>>64572091Let me put it this way.The Rock defeating three bruisers? I buy that. Ronda Rousey or Scarlett Johansson? Not in a million years.
>>64572116Assume none of them are women, for the moment. One dude vs. three. Is the one dude winning immersion breaking?>>64572117If we're going purely off character sheets, I've never seen a system that makes a womans stats lower than a mans.
>>64571400Great, then find me a setting where all women are magically enhanced to be as strong as men, then explain why men aren't also magically enhanced. Because the solution to all of the problems you just lists and why they don't crop up in fantasy tends to be; magic.
>>64572213>If we're going purely off character sheets, I've never seen a system that makes a womans stats lower than a mans.Right, that's the inexplicable part.
>>64572213Of course not. It's a staple of action movies.Now put a woman against the same opponents. Does that seem plausible to you?
>>64572203>The Rock defeating three bruisers? I buy that.Then you're a fucking hypocrite, because statistically the Rock has worse odds against those three bruisers than Scarlett Johannson would against one of them. If real-sorry, "verisimilitude" was ACTUALLY important to you, you wouldn't buy that 3v1 scenario for a hot second.But of course, that's a lot less fun, so we buy off on it. And similarly, it's a lot less fun to force an entire gender to be worse at fighting just because it's realistic, so in fiction women tend to be as good at fighting as men.
>>64572294>It's a staple of action moviesSo are hot Amazon women kicking ass.
>>64572203Why? The Rock defeating three bruisers is entirely implausible.
>>64572213>play roleplaying game for fantasy escapism >want to emulate fictional heroes doing impossible things like killing 30 trained knights at once solo>maybe kill a 60-foot firebreathing lizard with steel scales, using a 3-foot sword>or just brush off a grenade-like explosion without meaningful injury>"no anon a woman can't beat a man in combat, not even in fiction, that's unrealistic"This kind of naked hypocrisy is why fantasy has lost its whimsy
>>64572334Dont you mean 'inexplicable'?
>>64572286>Right, that's the inexplicable part.How is that inexplicable but a male character's sytats letting him defeat multiple opponents isn't? Why are some things that contradict reality okay but others aren't?
>>64572297No, no, see, the PC here, the Rock, has special abilities or training, as reflected in his stats, that ekebate him above those three generic HP block enemies. The issue isn't that the PC can't do amazing things, or even that female PCs can't. It's that, arbitrarily and inexplicably, females have identical stats to males. There's never any explanation for it, it is just somethong you are told is the case - it is an inexplicable part of the setting, whereas PCs being badass is explained by their sheets.
>>64572294Anon, I can think of plenty of action movies with a female character kicking ass. That logic just doesn't fly.
>>64572360No, anon. I mean it's implausible. Using the word 'inexplicable' in this context would make little sense. Hypthetical scenario where the Rock defeats three bruisers is implausible.
>>64572368>has special abilities or training, as reflected in his stats, that ekebate him above those three generic HP block enemies. That doesn't exist in real life. It is a divorce from reality, one we accept because it's cool. For the same reason, we accept equal women warriors in fiction.
>>64572368They are literally games about roleplaying a power fantasyThat's why they don't shove womens' faces in the dirt for so much as imagining a fictional woman being as strong as a fictional man
>>64572220No it isn't. There isn't a stated solution to the disease problem in the vast majority of fantasy settings, because no one gives a fuck.
>>64572409Also settings with women warriors usually don't present women in general as equally strong to men. It's just that stories focus on exceptional individuals, and as you said these exceptional individuals get to do exceptional things because it's cool.
>If you're using Verisimilitude to cause some archtypes to have less fun than others, you're missing the point of why people play fantasy settings in the first place.Clearly, this is the hardest pill to swallow for tabletop players, the idea that just because something is realistic, it doesn't inherently make it better.
>>64572409>>64572415>That doesn't exist in real life.It doesn't need to, this is about verisimilitude not realism; about consistency in the internal logic of the setting. The internal logic of the setting is that people get RPG powers from various sources, which explain rheir ability to compete with lofs of mundane people with decent stats. The setting does not, however, explain why women wpuld have equal stats as men do. It just says they do. It's inexplicable. To improve, just explain why that's the case - perhaps most women are indeed weaker than men and only strong women can even be eligible to be PCs, or oerhaos there is some magical divergence - just explain it.
>>64572434This, it's just autists being autistic.
>>64572433False. Warrior women societies in fiction are common, as are ones where the armed forces have an equal amount of women and men.
>>64569905>your ideal campaign will never exist
>>64572470I mean, if that's just a fact of the setting, whether it's explained or not doesn't really affect verisimilitude at all.
>>64572470Stop playing D&D
>>64572470>The internal logic of the setting is that people get RPG powers from various sourcesIncluding natural ability, which women have as much access to as men since there is nothing that says "Women should get less RPG power than men" in real life.
But I've had satisfying theatre of mind combats.
>>64572470>It just says they doIs there any reason why RPG powers can't similarly be used to explain why women are a match for men? It doesn't have to be explained for the same reasons a single high level PC being able to take on 10 generic bandits and win doesn't have to be explained. What this is is an arbitrary unwillingness on your part to accept that RPG powers is an equally valid explanation for both instances.
>>64572418One can assume a setting that includes relatively low level spells that cure diseases has little problem with plague because of the aforementioned healing magic.Now explain why women should be on par with men physically when in reality they're not
>>64572816Because that's how the setting works. Why would something that's just the natural state of affairs in the setting require explanation?
>>64572816Because of the same undefined RPG factors that allow PCs to be more awesome than regular people.
>>64572878Because the guy you're responding to can't live without a -2 STR to all female characters.
>>64572220>then explain why men aren't also magically enhanced.Magic Enhancement is a floor, not a multiplier? If being a Paladin means divine power makes you as strong ten men, then it doesn’t matter if you started with the strength of one man, two men, or half a man. Back before 3E, that’s how many stat-boosting items in D&D explicitly worked. You had a gauntlets of Ogre Strength that gave you an 18/00 no matter where you started, and Bracers of AC0 set your AC to 0 whether you were covered in plate or naked as a jaybird.
>>64572878Because if you want things to be different from reality as we know it you have to state it. For example if humans are somehow capable of eating rocks in your setting, you need to mention it as in real life they can't. We assume the world works the same as it does in reality unless you can explain why it shouldn't. In reality average men are stronger than average women and the strongest men are stronger than the strongest women. Why would it be different in your setting? Is there less sexual dimorphism causing women to look more like men?
Imagine being this verisimilitude "WOMAN WEAK!" faggot at a table. He is either quietly seething at a table where someone plays a female character or you throw a tantrum when ever someone plays a female character.
>>64572897But they aren't necessarily. You could have a world of 20th level NPCs in D&D if you have the time and patience to write them character sheets and run them correctly
>>64569905The Persuasion and Deception skills are not Charm Person.The Stealth skill is not Invisibility.Mashing a half-dozen templates together does not a compelling character make. We all know you're just trying to minmax. Just be honest, with both yourself and the rest of us.>>64572948Imagine hating women so much that this is all that fills their minds when they see a woman doing anything except cooking and cleaning. Imagine half of the humans on the world taking up all that space in their brains.
>>64569905Bullshit, your game and GM are just trash.When you do a piledriver to a werewolf and roll well enough to crash through the floor, that's pretty fucking satisfying. On a pre-gen map in D&D, it's prohibitively hard to pull off-book maneuvers with no pay-off and if you end up crashing through to the cellar, you gotta go TofM anyhow.
>>64572937Why? Give reasons, not just opinions. > Why would it be different in your setting?We've been over this already, anon. The onbly reason needed for something like that is that wroters of the setting want to have warrior women. Mybe they find that hot, maybe they find it cool, maybe they just want to let female players to also enjoy their power fantasies.
>>64572937>Wait a second, how does this 14th century equivalent feudal king have central governance and standing army as a late 17th century absolute monarch would have? How does a feudal structure support control that is reliant on such a strong beaurocracy?This is you a lot when playing DnD I imagine. You must ask questions like this all the time.
>>64572952Yeah, and then the PCs would inevitably have to become better than them in order to combat the threats that they can't. You're arguing that RPG logic should allow PCs to be inexplicably more awesome than civilians but arbitrarily shouldn't extend to allowing female PCs to be inexplicably on par physically with males.
>>64573077>This is you a lot when playing DnD I imagine.Really? To me it seems like he's stuck on this one particular issue while not giving a shit about either realism or verisimiltude in other respects.
>>64569905Dnd is the pinnacle of gaming (not 5e)
>>64573130Yeah, I'm willing to bet he doesn't bat an eye at halflings, gnomes, or other short races fighting human sized opponents, or human men fighting ogres and giants.
>>64572937The reality we live in does not place as much emphasis on physical power as it used to. A woman can do whatever it is you do for a living or be in a managerial position above you or whatever. If you want to play a game that stratifies people based on physical capability, then that is the exception to the reality that we know. Regardless, if the game features magic, and it does cause you're obviously D&D as fuck, why is realism even an argument?
>>64572017That's like, what, 11, 12 strength? More toned than buff
Homebrewing is the only correct way to play D&D or any other tabletop for that matter
>>64569905>>You cannot have satisfying combat in a tabletop game while relying on "theater of the mind," especially if the game relies on positioning for its combat mechanics.How is this a hard pill? It's like a basic pill.
>>64570317>it needs a grid.No. It needs a map, but not a grid. If you define 5ft as 1", then you can measure distances with measuring tape, without forcing things into discreet 5ft squares.
>>64570631This. GW killing the Old World, is probably the best thing to happen to the game, and fantasy war gaming in decades. Pretending AoS is good or a "worthy successor" is silly.
>>64573473not really hard to swallow that. It's fun
>>64573150Hard pills, not retard pills.
>>64573130It might have been sarcasm
>>64572110Torchbearer is shit, the worst "dungeon delver" game I've ever played.Combat is retarded. You're either a straight forward front line combatant, or you make up increasingly stupid descriptive ways of helping the ones who are. >I make funny faces at the goblins!
>>64569905>>You cannot have satisfying combat in a tabletop game while relying on "theater of the mind," especially if the game relies on positioning for its combat mechanics.Nechronica pulls most of this off pretty well, actually. Though positioning is simplified into five flavors of 'backline', 'midfield' or 'frontline.' It's still deep enough to add options and depth to the combat while still keeping most of the combat abstract.
>>64570049>light fudging of rollsIf you want to fudge the rolls, don't roll, simple as that.
>>64571075The character’s entire schtick is she’s strong via basically magic
>>64570676>tabletop rpgs are by their nature only entertaining to participate in, not to watch.Wrong.
>>64573077That too is bad, a really stupid trope that I avoid when I GM. And for reference, I have women characters as strong as men, just explained in that they are exceptional, as all PCs are, while most women are as weak as they are in reality.
>>64570378Agreed. Most of the reason my group switched from D&D to Cypher was the simplified combat, especially looking back 5e just seemed to drag so hard
>RAI has no bearing on a discussion on how the rules actually work; if a rule is vague enough to offer multiple interpretations based on how you read between the lines, it's a poorly written rule and a poorly written system by extension.
>>64569905If women being able to fight is seriously what breaks your immersion in a game where people can survive go toe-to-toe with monsters the size of battleships and survive falls from low orbit (among other impossible feats), then you have genuine, honest-to-goodness, not-even-memeing autism. Probably a severe case at that.
>>64574966well I mean it could also be that they hate women. Or both.
>>64574880This is why GMs exist (originally they were known as referees or judges).Rules are only made watertight by simplifying the complexity of the world. Which is fine for a board game but bad for an RPG.A GM is useful for adjudicating the inevitable edge-cases.
>>64569905That is entirely dependent on the system, genre, and tone of the game. For example in most supers games where there's quite a lot of mobility (flight, superspeed, acrobatics, etc.), powers don't have clearly defined mechanical ranges or are typically longer than any possible battle map, and the sheer number of variables involved make ttying to map combat needlessly time consuming and complex. It adds nothing to the game when theatre of the mind handles it far more easily. & That's just one example.
40k is heading for an AOS-style reboot and you will have to buy all-new models to play it. Everyone will be marines.
>>64574966Funny because it's most often people like you that then turn around and demand the removal of all "unrealistic" female armor.
>>64575066>Rules are only made watertight by simplifying the complexity of the world.They don't even need to be water-tight, just tell the player what they can and can't do and offer enough of a foundation for the DM to make an educated guess on how to resolve a ruling.In cases of RAW vs. RAI, the rule in question is written in such a way that it never really gives you a definitive yes or no question, which makes it a very poorly written rule because the entire point of the rules is to tell you, in no uncertain terms, how the game is supposed to function by default.
>>64570290Thiiiiiiis!It's why I prefer story games and shit. Let's get the conflict down to as few rolls as possible and get back to the interesting shit.
>>64572187Most Olympic events were segregated because men were complaining about getting beaten by women.
>>64570795Which universe and which writer, though?
>>64573524Because, people who play nothing but DnD got terrible of the awful combat and switched to rules light systems, and when confronted with a game that has superior mechanics falsely attributed it to the removal of a grid, and not the terrible combat.
>>64570290Entirely about preference. Though I agree to a degree that roleplaying generally takes precedence over raw mechanical combat. But I've had way more of a blast when the two go hand and hand properly. Some of my favorite systems have a lot of emphasis on the combat, Song of Swords for example and some of my favorite moments are when I used the options in the system to overcome a challenge through thinking. I've had a good time with FATE once, but it's a lot more cheapened when I'm basically just saying "okay I roll dice, and I got big number" instead of saying "Alright, I attempt to trip the man. Great, now that he's tripped I'll make a full power swing to his head with my reverse spike. My superior trip gives me +2 damage after I trip someone."
>>64573730Sometimes you need to get people to believe something is didn't have a predetermined outcome even though you know the truth.
>>64572368If, from childhood, all aspects of life of a boy and a girl are identical (training, diet, etc.) and assume as little genetic difference as possible (to account for random hormonal flares) you will result in two individuals who are so close in physical capability that any difference is entirey negligible. Most of what people think are inherent genetic differences are actually trained differences from birth. So it is not inexplicable that a woman who has been adventuring would arbitrarily be less capable than a male who has lived the same life path.
>>64575999While that may be true, that's better represented by the female PC having lower stats. Player Characters are not "typical" people by any stretch of the imagination. Player class levels have plenty examples of this, paladins are the result of a chosen few people qualifying for the powers and responsibility of being a paladin. Monks are similarly disciplined classes with a great deal of training. Even the fighter, which is arguably one of the more basic classes, is the result of a highly experienced warrior who's seen their fair share of battles and lived long enough to pick up a few tricks along the way. Effectively, any genetic or whatever difference between PCs would be entirely pointless, because PCs are not typical examples of their race any differences between them are represented by their different stat spreads and not -4 STR because they have a vagina.
>>64572017post more realxxiii
>>64569905>Puzzles rarely work in tabletop because puzzles work best in a visual medium rather than a descriptive one.
>The issue isn't that you were a woman/liberal/gay/furry/weeb/snowflake/etc. the issue was that you tried shoving down people's throats in the most obnoxious way possible while assuming the worst of everyone else around you.
>>64569905>satisfying combat>positioningthe kind of guy who thinks checkers is a satisfying combat game
>>64576912>the kind of guy who thinks checkers is a satisfying combat gameIt's certainly more engaging than having to check with the DM everytime I want to make sure that the dude I'm trying to hit is actually within range or not.
>>64575999> Most of what people think are inherent genetic differences are actually trained differences from birth.The main thing with that is you'll noticed that doing strength tests on men and women. Women on average rate .7 compared to the average mans 1.0. However even the strongest women using the same training as the strongest recorded man is a 3.2 vs around a 4.2-4.5 on the scale. So it obviously isn't a completely a training difference.
>>64576840>The issue isn't that someone tried to shove something down your throat, it's that your constant spray of bigoted comments make your company intolerable to decent people
>>64577587In today's political climate, everything could be construed as a bigoted comment, so that's not exactly saying much.
>>64577587>intolerable to decent peopleYou'll notice however that you will define decent people based on the people you agree with. Even if those people argue for things like genocide or ethnic superiority as long as they once in a while say something like "Women/Asians/Chinese/whatever are great people." The average person will eat them up as saints.
>>64577676This is me speaking from experience by the way. I've met plenty of people in my life that full on will tell me to my face that they want to kill every single person in the western world and that China or North Koreas system of government will be the future of the world if they have a say. Then listen to people around them call them good people who is kind to minorities and always tips the waiter and will look at you like your crazy if you bring up they think this.
>>64577823Shit people behaving nice in public is sort of a regular thing. Very common theme in domestic abuse cases.
>>64573077You're making the mistake of believing fantasy settings are historical and not simply atechnological. At no point has D&D or any of its settings claimed to have been set in (for arguments sake) the 17th century as you suggested. It is merely a depiction of technology in a similar time period with the added complications of magic and monsters. Honestly the existence of magic and monsters is already enough deflate your argument about governance, but again, it is never suggested that D&D or similar fantasy RPGs actually occur in a historical setting let alone accurately reflect the governance therein. However having men and women suggests the same gendered differences we see in all men and women across time. If you wish for the differences to be unlike reality, you need to explain why.
>>64569905That's a gamist interpretation. The problem here isn't that you're 'wrong' in any objective sense, it's that you're just another faggot who's opinionated to the point of solipsism.>>64570247>it'll feel like the DM is making shit up as he goes along to make sure that his own units are close/far enough for you to either hit them or just be outside of your character's range.Oh look, it's another episode of "Things aren't going exactly my way, it's because the GM hates me".
>>64569905>If you need a fantasy race to "be more interesting" in an tabletop rpg, your a shit roleplayer.
>>64576967>Being retarded>Blaming GMEver heard about a thing called "common sense"? You seem to be in desperate need of some.
>>64578972It starts to become annoying when you can't make any sound strategy because the DM forgot where everyone was. It just makes people default to "I attack [closest/most injured] enemy with my [weapon]" which just drags the combat down.
>>64579071>If you want any sort of escapism, you are a terrible person, now back to work, number 1549925634011
>>64578972>>64579075Oh boy, the contrarians are here.
>>64575201>lol I'm just gonna assume things about you with no basis.
>>64579071Good job posting something objectively wrong. Being able to pretend to be something you're not is great roll playing.
>>64570290I diagree. Playing pretend is better for LARP.
>Everyone posting in this thread is an insufferable faggot in one way or another
>>64580617>Everyone posting on this board is an insufferable faggot in one way or anotherFTFY
>Women aren't allowed to be good at fighting everYou need to go read some Irish mythology and realize by playing a tabletop game you are inherently not playing a realistic game.
>>64575999>you will result in two individuals who are so close in physical capability that any difference is entirey negligible.Lol
You will not make a unique world. Your totally-original-donut-steel idea has been done before. Your attempt at making a homebrew world will inevitably become like a pre-existing one.Embrace it.
>>64569905just have an active imagination lmaoit's satisfying if the players and GM are actually descriptive with actions
>>64572816It's not reality, anon.
>>64570898>But a woman shouldn't able to overcome a man in hand-to-hand combat barring explicitly-stated reasonsIt's not reality.
People who don't paint their miniatures aren't worth playing with.
>>64582067That's how it goes sometimes. As an example, for a game using a homebrew system built off of the Legend homebrew system, I had a mechanical idea I wanted to do, looked at the setting notes to decide how to put fluff to the abilities, ended up spawning a religion/cult in one of the nations in the process of detailing from whence his abilities sprung, and at the end of it I looked at my draconic lad that fights via fiery ash and went "well shit, I've made Teostra"
>>64579093In my experience, combat is more likely to be bogged down in more 'tactical' and detailed games because there's often someone who takes his sweet time coming up with a sound strategy. Some of the smoother fights I've seen, and ones with most creative tactics beyond just hitting the nearest enemy, have been in more narrative systems relying on theater of the mind.
>>64569905Wow, games with mechanics inherently tied mapping benefit from maps, holy shit. Damn. Would have never fucking thought of that. Care to name a few? More specifically care to name a few where the game "relies" on positioning. As in its a major feature of the combat system that actually encourages movement and not smash and swing? And the system has to rely on it. Your own words there, no generic answers like "every system" just because good gms will incorporate mobile objectives and the environment into combat.
>>64583458>Care to name a few? More specifically care to name a few where the game "relies" on positioning.D&D 3.5eD&D 4eD&D 5ePathfinder
>4e was the worst edition of D&D and it really did play like a tabletop MMO.
>>64583493This but unironically.
>>64583458GURPSOps and TacticsMekton (to a small degree)Twilight 2000Phoenix CommandJust stuff I've actually delved into to any real degree.
>GURPS is a great system, and needs both a skilled GM and competent players. Even as a foundation, it beats most games. It's to other games what AD&D was to D&D.
>>64583493>>64583519That's not even a hard pill to swallow, that's just stupidity. Like everyone loves to say "4e is le MMO LMAO!" yet they never bring up how every "fault" in 4e's design began with 3rd edition shitting the bed and giving the game a greater emphasis on character builds and "tactical" combat in the first place.
>>64583558Unfortunately, 3rd edition never had tactical combat, it has all the options for tactical fighting, but in practice all those options are traps. Because of how size bonuses make all those actions impossible, and how heavily feat taxed they are. It gets to the point where you're better off going "I take a 5 foot step to get flanking bonuses and full attack"
>>64583684That's why I used "tactical" with quotation marks, because as you said, it had options for it but it never actually developed a strong core to utilize those options effectively.It's honestly weird when you think about it, 3rd edition was the edition that shifted combat from being a fail state where you lost resources that made it harder to clear dungeons in the long run to a default assumption in how it's used to drain resources from players by default, yet 4e gets flak for actually making the combat more engaging while also making it so that every class functioned on the same relative power level as one another.
>>64583558>>64583684>>64583830Buttmad 3aboo is going to come in and "set the record straight" any minute now because people aren't shitting on 4e.I hope you're looking forward to a violent derail, followed by hours of him calling anyone who complains about 3.PF "obsessed" or "retards who don't actually play the game."Just the heads up, because it's probably going to happen.
>>64583486How do any of these rely on positioning in any degree more than *you have to be next to the guy to attack them*?>>64583529I'm connecting these all together with at least somewhat of an emphasis on cover and ranged play? Especially ops and tactics. Which if I remember has, what? Movement mechanics as complex and interesting as *you can move a certain distance, and you should probably be behind something*? That's your definition of a system relying on positioning?
>>64583917>How do any of these rely on positioning in any degree more than *you have to be next to the guy to attack them*?Flanking bonuses, cover bonuses, area effects like fireball, probably more if you really dig into it but this covers the "have you even played a game ever" stuff
>>64583830>>64583880I did enjoy playing a fairly low level fighter with a guisarme and trip. But I was acutely aware how pointless it was as well. At level 5 I had a fairly decent CMB of around +13 from all my feats if I tripped, but I also knew that against anything with two legs, my bonus meant shit and even worse if it was larger than me.
>>64583917Every system I noted has modifiers for opponents being within reach and you being against their flanks. Ops for example gives you a +2 to hit if you're to their flanks and +4 for being behind them, and likely negating whatever cover they have. Additionally, with longer weapons you have reach advantage (the spear feat tree can give you 5-20ft reach pikes) which means you can position yourself around allies and lock people down, especially since you can also trip (without any feat tax too!). Additionally, since you move using action points, sort of like a tactics video game, you're not limited to one move and attack per round at first level, which means you can do everything I've described without breaking an arbitrary 6 BAB point and forced to stand still and full attack.GURPS is even more reliant on flanking, because of the active defense system, flanking giving the opponent a -2 and being behind them completely disallowing their ability to defend against you, which further branches out in allowing you to take more risky all out attacks. Then you can play the reach advantage once more with stop thrusts, or stepping and attacking, getting behind allies and so on.So I'd say at least those two having fairly complex movement and attack options that have a lot more to do with positioning that requires a grid to effectively play.
>>64583949I know what you mean, there was one time I was in a 3.5 oriental adventures campaign as a Monk. I had nothing higher than a 14 in my stats and quickly realized how shitty my character was going to be, even with a +8 grapple check that the DM gave me at level 1 as a consequence of me being a Venara (monkey-man) and a trained martial artist.I guess it's a good thing he burnt out and eventually switched to a new system though, because it would've been heartbreaking watching my Monk go from being such a badass to becoming the weakest link over the course of a few levels as a result of the Monk class getting the shaft in 3.PF overall.
>>64584133The most soul crushing thing was next level when I could get greater trip. Which causes an enemy to provoke attacks of opportunity if I trip them, on top of my normal bonus, and with combat reflexes and reach I can trip people, attack them as they go down, then hit them again when they get up or if I felt really nasty, trip them again. Honestly, it was a good thing I had an alchemist who could give me enlarge person, so I could further extend my reach and trip bonus.shame the game died after one session
>>64569905Darkvision is a badly implemented mechanic that requires bending the nature of reality in order to justify its existence. Firstly, Elves (except maybe Drows) should not have access to it, as there's nothing in their biology which indicates it as a requirement, at least not the same level as other creatures such as Dwarves or Gnomes. Secondly, being in the middle of a grassy field under a full moonlit sky should not be as dark a the depths of a deep cave. But Darkvision and shitty DMing requires that all humans are just blind and helpless at night as soon as the sun goes down apparently.
Humans-only fantasy settings are not any better then any other type of fantasy settings, you're just the type of author who wants to virtue signal some sort of "elite" status when in reality you are painfully boring and almost certainly a bad writer as you are incapable of understanding why or when somebody would want to play a non-human race or character.
>>64570049I have never seen anyone complaining about the quantum ogre ever provide an example of when it happened to them. They only ever complain about it as a concept
>>64584486darkvision is fucking retarded in 5e, it basically just means that humans are unplayable shit unless your DM ignores light as a mechanic entirely. Same with elves and their 4 hour long rests, giving such huge utility bonuses as a racial trait is insane
>>64584579Does it really matter if a long rest is 4 or 8 hours? In practical terms those seem pretty much the same.
>>64575037It's usually them hating women more thany anything else.
>>64584629That's half the time, if a DM rolls an encounter every hour that's much, much less chance to get jumped. Alternatively if he decides to spring something on the party at hour 5-7 the elves will get their long rest stuff back. It's actually quite a big difference.
>>64584629it's either a huge advantage (in which case everyone who doesn't play an elf is fucked) or doesn't matter at all (meaning elves have a wasted racial trait)
>>64584544I guess it's because Quantum Ogre is like taxes in that it sucks in concept but needed. It's pretty hard to plan a game in which your "players" have basically free-range, so some sort of Planning has to be needed.
>>64584717Still better than dwarves, who have like 4 useless traits.
>>64584735More or less. a true sandbox style game on a week to week basis is probably fucking impossible unless your the kind of person who lack any social commitments beyond planning the game 24/7
>>64584768I wouldn't say that most sandbox games to my knowledge have encounter tables for particular dangerous areas, and percentile die rolls for encounters.
>>64584544The big thing is a player can't really prove the DM is doing it to them. Either way it's a fucking retarded thing to complain about - the DM literally cannot be expected to have something unique in store for every single action the players are willing to take.
>>64584867Enjoy those dirt roads
>>64582422This. You don't need to go full golden daemon, you don't even need to have your full army painted before you play, but at least put some fucking effort in.
Your group only hangs around together because of your campaign, if it weren't for tabletop none of you would talk or pretend to get along. Most of your tabletop friends hate you and will take the first chance they get to drop you. It's not worth trying to change it, since they're always talking behind your back about you. They're laughing at how bad your RP is behind your back, and think you're incompetent and can't compete. They just want you gone. If you disagree with one member of the group the rest will descend on you like a pack of wolves and banish you from the rest of their games. Your knowledge of tabletop will be wasted. The best option is suicide. Fuck you, Logan.
>>64570247>it'll feel like the DM is making shit up as he goes along to make sure that his own units are close/far enough for you to either hit them or just be outside of your character's range.Why is every GM out to cheat to kill their players? I have never had a gm do this.
>>64585159I don't know who logan is but I rest well knowing my two game group are either literal blood relatives or people I've spent enough time around to feel certain that they like me enough to think me their friend
>>64570506I agree, however even a regular female becomes stronger than any earth male if you give her strength items/buffs.One of the reasons I don't like 5th is that it killed that for me, magic items are so rare that a girl using a big ass axe would be implausible unless she is some kind of giant mountain of muscle, but few want to see/play with that kind of female character.
>>64584504That's just as stupid as "if you're not a human you're a race traitor." I got a setting where non-humans wont really make sense.
>>64569905I had a first time gm, who ran a campaign of the battle of Leningrad, and holy shit was one fo the best campaigns I was ever in. really in depth role play, we had entire sessions of mid battle character interaction, and super in depth accurate balls to the wall combat, the gm was keeping track of hundreds of troupes 90 percent of them our group of 5 didn't even see let alone interact with. It was fun as hell, and every aspect of the campaign thought provoking and intense. And this was a first time gm I stress.If you have a shity gm yeah they probably couldn't pull it off. Inversely if you table is filled with assberg complete social autists that couldn't talk thier way into a payday loan, or knucledragging bumblefuck chads that would cry at the sight of an rts, yeah you're going to have a bad time.
>>64584544>>64584865Personally I see no reason not to do it, or even base entire campaigns around "quantum ogres". If the players have no idea what will happen based on a decision, you might as well choose the outcome that's best for both narrative and fun regardless of that decision. When the player is given a choice of unknowns, "player agency" doesn't means squat. Instead, players should rely on known or semi-known options for their agency. For example, when players choose to go into an undead crypt rather than an ogre den, they expect to be fighting undead. That's them making a choice and dealing with the consequences. You can play with that on occasion (maybe an ogre recently decided to take over the crypt as his new den), but only rarely. If all they are choosing however is do they go left or right into the blind unknown you can put whatever you want to there.
>>64584579I don't really know how 5e plays, but a level 0 light spell or level 1 darkvision spell should effectively negate that entire advantage.
>>64586089Light makes you visible.Darkvision spell would be nice, but 5e doesn't do day-long buffs (unless it's a ritual or Mage Armor, or True Polymorph).Human rogues just have to eat the feat tax of getting Darkvision.
>>645861085e Darkvision spell is 8 hours. It either lasts the entire night, or more than long enough for dungeon delving.For rogues, being visible is an issue. For the rest of the party it probably isn't. You could easily give the rogue something like a wand of darkvision if he wanted it (I assume such items exist and are usable by class).
>>64586133Wow, I somehow forgot that spell was 8 hours.If magic items are on the table, there's goggles that give darkvision, it's a common magic item even.
>>64584504I just like down to earth low-magic settings, I don't get why that is considered elitism.
>>64584504>H.P. Lovecraft is a boring bad writer because there are no catgirls investigating XIX century Boston for clues of ancient alien conspiracies. I hear you fampai.
RPG worlds don't have to brim with creative ideas, having clichés and bogstandard classical interpretations of fantasy races is completely fine. The point of an RPG world is to be playable, not to be sold as a revolutionary fantasy novel, and doing things by the books allows players to get a grip of stuff, because they already know how basic things function.I'm not saying that you shouldn't be creative, I am saying that playability is an important aspect of desigining a world for an RPG, maybe even more important than creativity.
>>64586170Because you don't shut up about your preferences
>>64586229But I do, this is the first time in ages I have said something like this.
>>64575999I hope this is bait because you clearly don't know a single thing about human sexual dimorphism and should really stop pretending you do.
>>64570247>You're in a mine, the cart you are pulling taking up most of the space in the mine shaft. >You have agreed to have two in front of the cart, two behind the cart>Zombies attack your group, you have two shambling towards you, and two are behind the cart for your friends to take care of. What do you want to do?>i WaNt To AtTaCk ThE zOmBiE bEhInD uS>The cart is in the way, it'll take your movement for the turn to clamber over it, you sure about this?>WHY DO YOU HATE GM THIS WOULDN'T HAPPEN IF WE HAD A MAPIt doesn't matter what you do as a GM, players will bitch and moan. If you use a map, you can be sure that they'll complain "Well the mini can't fit the space but I mean realistically I would be able to squeeze past this obstacle" and so on and so forth.Both GM's and players should work together to make it an enjoyable experience, not try to defeat the other party due to herpderping the rules/system/situation.
>>64570542>grand event that wrapped up all the loose plot hooks.Why do people prefer this to literally leaving plot hooks open for RPG/Tabletop campaign purposes?I personally find that if I know the "big secret" or "ending" of a setting or system, I lose interest in it. For example learning the big Cybertronic secret from Mutant Chronicles just went from "this is mysterious and intriguing" to "oh. So that's it, huh." which isn't nearly as interesting."What does it matter what we do, the world will die two years from this point in time anyway".
>>64572187Not quite true, most events would indeed be male dominated. But skeet shooting, women have won golds competing against men, before they split the sexes.
>>64572187Yeah, but those women still beat ~ 90% of men in their sport.Again, why is it important for you that a women must lose?
>>64571895While playing PARANOIA, I always roll the dice behind a screen and tell the players what I want to tell. I don't ever tell them how high or low they need to roll, I just go with feeling. Just because you need to roll under 12 to hit with your pistol and roll an 11 doesn't mean shit when you tell them "oh yeah but the poor lighting conditions ruin your shot."Fudging dicerolls is a good thing to do, if you do it gracefully. It helps you make the story more interesting than making it totally random, or at worst an exercise at seeing who rolls the higher number five times in a row.
>>64569905There is nothing inherently wrong with erotic roleplaying or describing intimacy between characters, even if the other player is of the same gender as you and can add to the experience of a game.
>>64584867This, taxes are little more than legalized rent. Wake up sheeple! it's RENT!
>>64586640If rent didn't exist, the housing market would crash.
>>64586649about timeit's fucked up that there's a market for the basic human need of not freezing to death on a cold night
>>64586659If there was no market for it, these needs would largely not be fulfilled at all.
>>64586217>I can only think in utter extremes, because that's how severe my autism is
>>64586676... reallyyou think people didn't have houses before there was a housing marketwould the existing houses just disappear
>>64573692I bought the rulebook, read the rules, and realized I'll never play it. It seemed grim and dark and simple, but in the end it just felt awkward when reading through it, and the whole city phase was just... Am I supposed to roleplay, book-keep or what, here?
>>64569905>Campaign-based wargames are pointless. You're going to get more out of a specifically designed boardgame or D&D. "Your Dudes" is a buzzword, they aren't really "Your Dudes".>Setting up terrain and miniatures and then moving them around is just sad. Play a video game or find some friends. If you can't make friends you shouldn't be playing tabletop games.
>>64586696They wouldn't disappear, but they would be missmanaged and no one would build new houses after a while. Eventually, the old ones will erode away.
>>64586787why wouldn't you repair the house you live inwhy wouldn't you build a new house, if it is needed
>>64586515>Why do people prefer this to literally leaving plot hooks open for RPG/Tabletop campaign purposes?People like to know things. That's basic human nature
>>64586806I would try to, but many people simply don't have the (financial) capabilities to do so, and the overall quality of houses would dwindle.
>>64586806>why wouldn't you repair the house you live inThere's a limit to how much you can repair.>why wouldn't you build a new house, if it is neededAnd without the market who's going to be trained to actually build one? A proper one, not just a hut made from mud and straws.
>>64586827why don't many people have the financial capabilitiesthey have the capabilities of paying rentthe owner of the house usually turns a profit with that rent even when he is obligated to keep the house repairedso if you can afford rent... why wouldn't you be able to afford repairs>>64586843>There's a limit to how much you can repair.does this limit not exist on the free market?>And without the market who's going to be trained to actually build one? A proper one, not just a hut made from mud and straws.there was nothing in the thousands of years between capitalism and huts made of straws
>>64586818That's why "knowing things" makes for a good carrot to dangle in front of them, just out of reach. The trick to good writing/game design etc is feeding the players just enough information to keep them interested, but NEVER giving them everything. Once you give them what they want, the story/game is over.
>>64586954You know what, you have somewhat of a point. Houses wouldn't disappear. But without a market for houses, the overall quality of them would diminish, or fluctuate greatly. Markets usually drive up quality, unless they go completely out of control.
>>64587018>Markets usually drive up qualityno, they don't, that's a common misconceptionmarkets drive up profitabilityhousing had been steadily getting worse as people keep cutting corners to improve profitsif housing didn't have an assload of regulation, you'd be typing this from a hut made of asbestos
>>64587018markets drive up the quality of the higher end and push down the quality of the lower end, thereby maximizing profits.Non-market housing in countries were most politicians aren't trying to make public services as bad as possible offer generally pretty consistent meddle of the road housing with little fluctuation.
>>64579096>>64579740I'm pretty sure Anon was referring to the people who go "I don't understand why anyone would want to play a human in a fantasy game, they're so boring!" without understanding that it's not being a human that is boring, but being a bad roleplayer that is.I like playing humans in fantasy settings with other species/races, because I like the interactions that come from there.
>>64586954>does this limit not exist on the free market?You are missing the point. Professional repairs will go away when their's no market for them>there was nothing in the thousands of years between capitalism and huts made of strawsAnd modern house is far more complex to be done without professional labor
>>64586987>Once you give them what they want, the story/game is over.And that's fine
>>64587230If you want nobody to ever play the game again, sure. Which is, incidentally, exactly what GW wanted with WHFB.>>64587221Just the housing market is gone in the thought experiment, house owners etc. would still pay craftspeople for repairs.
>>64587221you don't need the free market for a profession to exist (ignoring how housing market going away wouldn't mean that repairs go away, since people still live in houses and need repairs)professions, much like housing, existed before capitalism
>>64577587>implying SJWs are not bigots
>>64586649It actually wouldn't.
>>64569905>conservatives are always wrong
What the fuck is even going on in this thread anymore
>>64587950shut the fuck up you low test beta nu-male
>>64569905Learn to use your imagination more.
>>64584486Have you ever been out of civilization at night? Shit's dark.
>>64587984Not always. Most of the time the moon cycles will light up your surroundings rather well, and your eyes can adjust the rest of the way. Give yourself enough time and you'll be pretty good.
>>64587950It got derailed by /pol/ and their detractors, just like every other thread since the election.
>>64588162Wow, it's almost as if /pol/posters should stay in their containment board because if you let them out, they disingenuously shit on every fucking thread until this happens.
>>64588180It takes two to tango faggot. Screeching autistically because someone brought up political nonsense, regardless of whether it's in regards to the right or the left, is fucking stupid.Ignore the stupid fools, report them for low quality posts, hide them if necessary, and move the fuck along until they get bored and move on to greener pastures.>But they never get boredThey do, it's just that nobody, especially on /tg/, bothers not to bite onto the bait long enough for this shit to work, and then get angry when they find more low quality bait floating around due to the fact that trolls see how easy it is to amass (you)'s.You notice how fedora flippers aren't a strong personality anymore since the mid 2010's? The same shit will happen to /pol/ once the Trump administration ends.
>>64586222doesn't work so well for sci fi, because there are no universally constant races, technologies or locations to default to.
>>64574966What about games where people can't survive going toe-to-toe with gigantic monsters or surviving great falls? Games where the heroism is just surviving the natural struggle with the supernatural being something that cannot be tamed, let alone overcome by men?Personally my opinion is still the same, I prefer women in most cultures to have fighting positions, but that's just me.
>>64588294Which also might explain why sci-fi tabletop outside of established settings (eg star wars, 40k etc) doesn't really exist. "Generic" fantasy is a thriving genre, but "generic" sci-fi is almost entirely home-brew and doesn't catch on that well.
>>64588284Nice try, you /pol/ posting faggot
>>64588284Go back to your containment board.
>>64588284>report them for low quality postswhich does nothing because hiro prefers the low quality shitposters, what with their activity boosting ad revenue.
>>64588597I've reported plenty of posts that got deleted for being low quality. Just because Hiro prefers shitposters doesn't necessarily mean he's going to let every single instance slide, especially if enough people bother to report that shit rather than engaging in it and pretending that it's the only way to stop the shitposters.
>>64588518>>64588536>Post telling people to stop feeding trolls and they'll go away>"Go BaCk To CoNTainMenT LoL!"People like you are why /pol/lacks never leave. Like how hard is it to hide/report a post and then not respond to it? We already know /pol/lacks are shit that doesn't belong here, yet you seem to want to reward these idiots by giving them (you)'s?Okay
>>64588698You let the mask slip, dude.You need to go back.
>>64588720Because I told you that giving trolls (you)'s won't actually make them go away? Whatever dude, I don't even go onto /pol/ but if it makes you feel better, I can't exactly stop you.
>>64569905>tabletop rpgs with movement mechanics are just bad wargames.
>tabletop rpg's are just a poor stand in for actual conversation amd hobbies>you may as well just kill yourself now to save yourself the lifetime of shame and embarassment
>>64588810What tabletop RPGs have you played that lacked movement mechanics?
>people defaulting to the "waaah it's /pol/" boogeyman when they're this easy to baitYou orchestrate your own suffering.
>ignoring a problem won't make it go away
>>64588993>Complaining about a problem won't make it go away either.
>>64589058I mean, it worked for womenand minoritiesthey complained so hard they can vote now and everything
>>64589070The sad thing is that you think you're being clever by comparing your drivel to the actions undertaken by those groups.
>>64589070No, it worked because women and minorities at the time were willing to get off their asses and get shit done, rather than complain about it on social media 24/7.Nothing has ever gotten solved by complaining about it, nothing.
>>64572189Not much different from one who is 6'4 and 300 lbs, especially if the 3 opponents are even half that size.
>>64589120>>64589112I mean, if I had the ability to track poster IP I'd probably try to cleanse the /pol/ filth from /tg/, but since I do not possess that ability, I'm left with complaining.
>>64572189He's sure to win because his speed is superior.
>>64589151wow so badass, I wish I could be more like you
>>64570247Without a grid, It feels like a book you're reading, which isn't a bad thing.
>>64589151>In order to preserve my way of life, I have to kill everyone who I find a degenerate.Man, the similarities seem to grow each and every day.
>>64589221>not being able to post on /tg/ equals deathare you okay?
>>64569905> People who have never actually played D&D believe that rolling 1's on skill checks lead to HILARIOUS CONSEQUENCES like you turning gay because an orc seduced you or singing Run DMC songs because you rolled a 1 during stealth checks.> RAW says you can't fumble on a skill check, you can just roll poorly.
>>64589241Ah, my mistake, I read it as you going out and tracking down shitposters and "cleansing" them by murdering them.Either way, you already have a means of doing that, it's called a "report" button.
>>64589221Not all opinions are made equal./pol/ shits are objectively cancer and removal of them is rationally a good thing to do.
>>64589267>/pol/ shits are objectively cancer and removal of them is rationally a good thing to do.And y'know what, they feel the exact same way about the people they don't like as well.
>>64589151>cleanse the /pol/ filth from /tg/Figure out how to pass the janitor application, then be one of the good ones
>>64589304>this is why you can be rough with /pol/fags; if they don't like it, they can just stopHow many times has "being rough" with a troll ever made them stop? If anything, it just makes them shitpost harder out of spite.
>>64589374If "being rough" means deleting their shit and banning them, it'll at least make for a better environment. On a site like 4channel, it's like weeding when you're not allowed to pull it up by its roots. You just have to be consistent about cutting it down when it comes up.On non-anonymous boards it's more like being allowed to pull them up by the roots and throw them aside. It shows in the quality of the better ones, when it's harder to ban-evade and it takes a bit of work to set up new accounts.
>>64589260You can't crit on a skill check either.
people that fudge dice and do quantum ogres are hacks that think that random rolls add tension, and that players don't realize when their choices are meaningless. this type of game mentality breeds passive braindead players and corrupt their creativity. Open up your eyes, your players just chose to follow the rails because that is what you gave them. and when they come to my table I have to rehabilitate then to become active players again. fuck you.
>>64590204>when they come to my table I have to rehabilitate then to become active players again. fuck you.That only seems like an issue if you have a high turnover on players. Like, if you already have a group, why would you care about "rehabilitating" players in the first place?